Announcement Module
No announcement yet.

New Brotherhood Ceremony

Page Title Module
Move Remove Collapse
Conversation Detail Module
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • New Brotherhood Ceremony

    So the New Brotherhood ceremony was released yesterday and after reading it, I mean devouring it, I can say that there are some items in it that are most definitely not to my liking. Am I alone? Be aware that Ordeal members can see this page.
    Who likes the ceremony?
    Yes I loved it!!!
    I think that it is a good start but still needs work.
    Hated it, why did we even need a new one?!?!?!?!?!

  • #2
    Ain't seen it yet


    • #3
      What is the link to the new ceremony script???!!!


      • #4
        It's there, you just aren't squinting hard enough. They had to make the font small, it's a secret ceremony.



        • #5
          Just read it twice, I can see what they are trying to do. I like the explanations as the ceremony progresses rather than at the end. But the style is so not Longfellow. where is the cadence, the flow? and where o where is the..O of the B?


          • #6
            well i guess it really boils down to the presentation....not impressive if the principals are reading it.


            • #7
              So, found the ceremony and went through it a few times. Very different, not quite what I was expecting, but all in all, not bad. I do like the fact that the symbolism is explained at the end; very helpful to performers. One area is not quite clear and that’s where the Principals (in each their respective turn) should move to “where all Candidates can see and hear them and where the fire lights their features”. I assume they simply move to a spot closer to the fire where they can still be seen by all the spectators – doesn’t seem to mater where exactly, or am I reading that wrong??

              Two things that I’m really not too crazy about are – the name of the “adversary” and the pronunciation of the Principal’s names. Being a Linguist, perhaps I’m being overly picky, but one would think that in creating a new ceremony and supposedly analyzing the &#%$ out if it, you’d think they would have done the research and properly corrected the pronunciations and come up with a better name for the adversary.

              I see where they are going with the adversary’s name and I understand and “get” the symbolism behind it, but what you end up with is a name that means absolutely nothing; it’s not a legitimate word. From the name, we can infer that he is supposed to be a Mohawk. “Mahakwa” does mean Mohawk (from mahkwa – “bear”), and “mehuk” does mean ‘blood’ (which is possibly a misspelling by Zeisberger for what is in Southern Unami “hmukw” – I suspect this Northern Unami form should be the same and indeed in his grammar he spells it “mhuk” which is probably how he heard ‘hmukw”). Though the symbolism is nice, the name as it’s reinvented has no meaning in and of itself. Too bad – I would have liked to have seen an actual Kanienkehaka (Mohawk) name.

              The whole explanation of “Nutiket’s” name – no idea where to even begin with that one; you could write a paper on it! The reference the author(s) make in trying to offer an explanation is to two totally different words using two completely different orthographies (spelling systems); one Northern Unami (where all the OA words come from) and one Southern Unami (the modern spoken language) – suffice to say that in Lënape, the word noo-TEE-ket (which comes from the verb noo-TEE-kay) means “one who stays at home”.

              NOO-t’-ket (spelt nutëkèt in SU) on the other hand, means “guard” (“one who watches over” though is actually nutëmat – same ending as ‘nimat’).

              The correct pronunciation of the Guard’s name is NOO-t’-ket – stress MUST fall on the first syllable here (though normally in Lenape it’s on the next to last – there’s a reason it has to be on the first syllable in this case has to do with assigning main stress on words in Lenape). The apostrophe here is the “schwa” sound. Take care to fully pronounce the last syllable to rhyme with “met”, don’t pronounce it with a schwa or ‘ih’ sound (i.e. it’s not NOO-t’-kit !!).

              Again with properly assigning main stress in Lenape, the Chief’s name is properly pronounced aw-LOH-wawt saw-KEE-maw (all the ‘a’ sounds here are like the ‘aw in “saw” or “paw”).

              Lastly, there is NO ‘ch’ (as in “cheese”) sound in the Guide’s name! Without getting into details, his name is a bit tricky for speakers of English (as it was for Zeisberger’s German!). The best/easiest way t opronounce this (though it’s not quite right) is kee-KEEN-het. There should actually be a slight puff of air just before the second ‘k’ so kee-HHKEEN-het. If any of you speak Finnish this is the same as ‘h’ before ‘p, t’ and k” in Finnish (or Estonian as well).

              OK – long enough post – just my 2 cents worth.


              • #8
                Should have clarified a bit above - the k' s (both 'k' 's ) in the Guide's name should not be pronounced as 'k' in "cot", but rather like the 'k' in "Scot", i.e. there is no puff of air AFTER the k's here, just one BEFORE the second one. For some it may be easier to substitutre 'g' for 'k'.


                • #9
                  So I think that the old ceremony needed to be changed and this new ceremony takes a completely opposite approach to how to explain brotherhood. I think there needs to be a middle ground somewhere. Keep some of the traditions such as how they great each other in the old ceremony, keep the old closing, and combine everything else from the new one.


                  • #10
                    I actually don't mind the opening or closing - even with this closing, Meteu can deliver his final lines from a more impressive location - we use a 20+ foot boulder (scaffolding and ladder on back to a platform) said boulder just happens to be somewhat in the shape on an arrowhead. When the others are going through their lines and snuffing out the candles, Meteu sneaks out of the "stage area" and reappears atop the rock to deliver his final invocation. I'm glad to see the new cermeony affords the same opportunity as it's quite effective!

                    I don't mind not doing the 'taps' - I can see the logic and reasoning behind it. I do like the way the new ceremony closes in that the Principals reveal what they represent in the Candidates.

                    I sometimes feel that it's really only the Ceremonialists who fully appreciate and understand the symbolism behind every part of the ceremonies. I almost think that the explanation section at the end should be required reading after the B-hood cermeony so people can gain a better understandning of the symbolism - something often missed altogether.


                    • #11
                      Gave it a good read, and another to take it apart. I'm huge on preserving tradition, but I always found the Brotherhood Ceremony flat, and uninspired, failing to met the stand set by the Pre-Order, Ordeal, and Vigil. I like what I'm reading, but the Jury is out until I see it done both well, and poorly.


                      • #12
                        If anyone is interested, I had written a short study on Lenape words in the Order - to quote from the introduction:

                        This short study examines the pronunciation of the Lenape names of the four Principals found in Order of the Arrow ceremonies as well as some of the other names and phrases found in Ceremonies. Over the almost one hundred years the Order has been in existence, very Anglicized pronunciations have more or less become the “standard”. This exercise offers the correct pronunciation with an insight as to how the incorrect versions originated.

                        I don't think I can attach it here as a file, but if anyone is interested, I'd be happy to forward it to you - just send me an e-mail or let me know your e-mail address.


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by MikeS View Post
                          I see where they are going with the adversary’s name and I understand and “get” the symbolism behind it, but what you end up with is a name that means absolutely nothing; it’s not a legitimate word.
                          In the first written version of the Ordeal there were at least 6 principles in the ceremony. Why not bring one of them back into the story?


                          • #14
                            I have read it and taken some time to digest it and there is so precious little that I like about it. I thought the old one could use some work and was unwieldy if you had a large ceremony, but I don't like the new one at all.

                            There's symbolism that's wrong and confusing. There's continuity problems. I'm just really not impressed with it.

                            If your fire, which was large enough to be seen from a different mountain, goes out in an ice storm, your problem is a lack of kindling? (I think I know why your fire went out.) And you're going to burn your bow and thus give up your ability to hunt for food?

                            And Uncas was out warning his fellow Delawares about an impending invasion - so what was he doing in enemy territory anyway? ("With friends and allies far behind him, only enemies could be ahead.") I realize that their territory wasn't necessarily contiguous, but it seems like if you're trying to visit your allies and there are only enemies ahead, there's a problem with your process.


                            • #15
                              Yeah, I know what you mean, Big Dave. I didn't want to go there - "poetic license", I suppose, but I think the script should have been released for a more wider review than what it was. Be nice if this one could be considered a "draft" and the "final copy" be released in say late January of next year - enough time for some additional input and revision and for people to learn it.

                              The Gong - you could bring back another Principal/helper, but it is at times a logistical nightmare to try and get just the four together at one time for even a scheduled add one more to the list...